ART HISTORY

Art History

Art History

What were the similarities and differences in the politics that lead to WWI, Russian Revolution, WWII, and The Cold War?

"If the power is really the deployment of a strength ratio, should not be analyzed in terms of fighting, fighting, war? Power is war, war continued by other means, be reversed and Clausewitz's assertion, saying that politics is war continued by other means. This means three things: first, that power relations as they operate in a society like ours are in place, essentially, under a certain balance of power established at a particular time, historically traceable to the war (Buyukokutan, 2011). And if it is true that political power does end the war, makes or attempts to reign peace reign in civil society, is to suspend the effects of war or to offset the imbalance shown in the final battle, the power political, under this scenario would have the role to reinscribe, perpetually, the balance of power by a kind of silent war, it was included in the institutions, economic inequalities, in language, in short, in the bodies of each other . Politics as war by other means would be continued in this first sense a turn to Clausewitz's aphorism, that is, serious politics corroboration and maintenance of the imbalance of forces that manifest themselves in the war (Garcia, 2010). But the reversal of this phrase means something else: in the interior of this "civil peace", the political struggle, fighting for power, power, power, changes in power relations, the stresses in a sense, reinforcements, etc.., all in a political system should not be interpreted only as the continuation of the war, that is, must be read as episodes, fragments, displacement of war itself. Not written but the story of this war even when writing the history of peace and its institutions (Fiero 2010). The return given to Clausewitz's aphorism means finally a third thing, that the final decision can not only come from the war, a showdown in which, finally, the weapons will be the judges. The last battle would be the end of politics, only the last battle suspend therefore indefinitely the exercise of power as continual warfare.

In military warfare, achieved the strategic aim of destroying the enemy army and the occupation of their territory, there is peace. It should be noted, moreover, that by the end of the war enough that the strategic aim is achieved only potentially, or simply that there is no doubt that an army can not fight more and that the victorious army "may" take enemy territory (Fiero 2010). The political struggle is vastly more complex. In a sense can be parangonada with wars or with the old colonial wars of conquest, when the victorious army occupies or intends to take in a stable all or part of the conquered territory. Then the defeated army is disarmed v scattered, but the struggle continues in the political arena and in the "preparation" military (Fiero 2010).

Thus, the political struggle of India against the British ...